The Trump Revolution was not exclusively or even primarily about “economic populism,” it was about native American revanchism. Many who now claim the mantle of the Trump legacy focus solely on economics and ignore or condemn the identity/culture aspect entirely.
— Nicholas J. Fuentes (@NickJFuentes) March 18, 2021
Remember that Donald Trump only grew more popular in the polls after his “drug, crime, and rapists” comment as well as his proposal to ban all Muslims from America. That attitude was not an inconvenient flaw, that was a necessary feature of the Trump Revolution.
— Nicholas J. Fuentes (@NickJFuentes) March 18, 2021
Trump’s abrasive tone was actually one of the best and most redeeming parts of his otherwise frustrating presidency, especially the first three years.
— Nicholas J. Fuentes (@NickJFuentes) March 18, 2021
Here are three important things you need to know about Nick Fuentes:
First, Nick Fuentes is a Zoomer paleocon who was a Ted Cruz supporter during the 2016 Republican primary. Fuentes was a budding Cruzie. Oddly enough, it wasn’t until Fuentes went to Charlottesville that he became well known and it wasn’t until 2018 and 2019 that he attracted a following among Zoomers who WERE NOT the people who elected Donald Trump in 2016. Most Zoomers were too young to have an impact on the 2016 election. The constituency that elected Trump was older than Zoomers.
Second, Trump performed WORSE among younger voters in 2020 than he had in the 2016 election. Donald Trump did not win Zoomers. The idea that Zoomers are paleocons like Nick Fuentes is hilarious. No, the youth vote for Trump actually declined in the 2020 election, which shines an interesting light on the feud between Charlie Kirk and Nick Fuentes which is a feud between conservatives. Charlie Kirk represents Conservatism, Inc. or the True Cons or GOP establishment wing of the party. Nick Fuentes, however, represents the paleocon or social conservative stratum that used to be the conservative base.
This is the “Dissident Right.”
The fight between the “Dissident Right” and the “GOP establishment” is the same fight involving the same people that has always gone on between the Republican base and the Republican establishment.
Third, Nick Fuentes is a paleocon, which means he is somewhere in the MIDDLE to RIGHT of the Republican party. He is a social conservative and an economic conservative. The paleocons, however, are not the populists and nationalists. Half of the Republican Party is to the Left of Nick Fuentes on economics.
The “Dissident Right” IS NOT the “Alt-Right.”
According to Fuentes, the Alt-Right are Gen Xers and Millennials who are White Nationalists. As Groypers understand the “wignats,” they are atheists who are basically socialists or communists on economics. They are to the Left of the Groypers even though they are adjacent to them.
Charlie Kirk = Core Conservatives
Nick Fuentes = Country First Conservatives
Brad Griffin/Matt Parrott = Market Skeptic Republicans (on the Independent end)
Mike Cernovich = New Era Enterprisers
Note: Nick Fuentes is a “Latinx” voter though and Trump did make gains in that demographic.
FUCK FUENTES AND ALL HIS FELLOW FAKE NATIONALIST CATBOYS
Conservatives = Grifters = Republican Party.
These guys care more about the grift than actually changing anything.
The biggest thing plaguing WN is the lack of money. I’m not talking about pocket change, I’m talking about large amounts, so they can buy their way in.
Whenever a WN gets some money, they get criticized. I don’t know how anyone expects them to get off the ground with no money.
Nationalism is about culture, race, language, identity. The driver is not economics. I agree with Nick is right in that sense and is is right to push back on Bannon has made nonsensical terms like “economic nationalism” which isn’t a real term to me (it’s Civic Nationalism). However, to state that Nationalism bring along with it certain economic realities or has economic components is just wrong. Someone who states that Nationalists countries don’t trends towards certain things economically, shows a very poor understanding of Nationalism. Nationalism is nativistic. Nativism trends towards autarky, reindustrialization, protectionism, tariffs [stereotypically on countries but can be on companies], job hiring prioritization laws, localism [when it comes to economics], immigrant point system, retraining of the workers to diversify the native production/or alter it, less reliant on global trade, and so on.
But every time I’ve listened to Nick, he embodies what a Conservative *thinks* Nationalism is (chanting America first a bunch of times, excessive flag waving, loving America, yadda, yadda, yadda). Almost like this Dr. Dooley guy on youtube (? no idea his name forgot it. tried to find him). And a more Christian nut (that doesn’t believe dinosaurs existed before humans, etc). Although he gets into anti-materialism (which is anti-liberal).
I guess I could call Nick a [basic] Nationalist in some sense. I’m really not understanding the difference between a “Paleocon” and a Nationalist. He incorporates race, cultural, language, identity, heritage in what he conceives as an organic community or “Nation.” He rarely talk about economics though. I haven’t heard him mention it once. He talks about how the paradigm of “capitalism vs socialism” is outdated. That is the only thing he has ever mentioned that I can remember.
Also, the first three years? What does he mean? Is the last year, Trump’s best year according to Nick? Based on his abrasive tone? Wasn’t he more abrasive and anti-establishment before he took office? Listening to him recently, his rhetoric sounded more like any other Conservative than any other time in politics. Maybe I’m missing something here.
I bet a lot of people will criticize anyone from the Right, but will turn around and embrace the usually bunch of Republican sellouts.
This is a boomer thing. You know, rich guys with lots of money that don’t need to work. Rich guys buying second homes, going on constant vacations, living it up.
It’s the younger people who see the country falling apart and want a future.
How many people here know that Nick Fuentes was a Ted Cruz supporter in the primary who called Trump “racist” and opposed Trump’s immigration policies in 2015 or 2016? There is a video out there that I have seen from one of his early video casts of him calling Trump “racist.” I can’t find it now, does anyone have the link?
This video proves for 100% certain that Fuentes is grifter and fraud. We need to find this video and make it go viral. It will end the gay mexican midget’s grifting career.
How often in your life have you ever changed your mind?
Do you hold all the same views as you did when you were the age Nick was in 2016?
I am Gen X and I have changed my opinions about many things over the years.
I didn’t even get redpilled on anything until around early 2018.
So as for those opinions, they are vastly different than what I held just a few short years ago.
Is it possible that Nick changed his mind on something? It seems simplistic to just say,
“he supported Ted Cruz a few years ago, therefore, grifter.”
Good points.
Good points.